AMD Radeon 890M vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 Comparison

The AMD Radeon 890M and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 represent two very different philosophies in GPU design: one is a modern integrated processor aimed at mobile efficiency, and the other is a dedicated workstation card from a previous generation. The benchmark data shows a clear and consistent performance hierarchy, with the 890M winning all nine head-to-head comparisons, but the underlying specifications reveal why these GPUs are built for entirely different tasks. This analysis walks through the numbers to show where each part excels and which user profile each best serves.

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 890M compare to the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 in overall average benchmark score?

A: The 890M has an average benchmark score of 9210, which is higher than the Pro WX 5100’s 8863. The 890M sits at the 45th percentile among all GPUs, while the Pro WX 5100 is just below at the 44th percentile.

Q: Which GPU is faster in compute workloads like Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon 890M is significantly faster, scoring 37254 in Geekbench OpenCL compared to the Pro WX 5100’s 24217. This translates to a 53.8% advantage for the 890M.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two cards in any single benchmark?

A: The largest margin is in the Passmark DirectX 11 test, where the 890M scores 73 versus the Pro WX 5100’s 36. This is a 102.8% difference, meaning the 890M is more than twice as fast in that specific test.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro WX 5100 win any benchmark comparison?

A: No. According to the head-to-head data, the AMD Radeon 890M wins all 9 benchmark comparisons (winsA: 9), while the Pro WX 5100 wins none (winsB: 0).

Q: What kind of memory does the Radeon Pro WX 5100 use, and how does that differ from the 890M?

A: The Pro WX 5100 uses 8 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 890M uses system shared memory, with a bus width and bandwidth that are system dependent.

Q: What are the production statuses of these two GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon 890M is listed as "Active," while the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 is "End-of-life." The Pro WX 5100 was released in November 2016, and the 890M was released in July 2024.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is stark. The AMD Radeon 890M is built on TSMC’s 4 nm process node and uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture, representing the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point mobile. In contrast, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 is a dedicated card built on GlobalFoundries’ 14 nm process using the older GCN 4.0 architecture, part of the Radeon Pro Polaris generation. This process difference is significant: the 890M packs 34,000 million transistors into a 233 mm² die, yielding a density of 145.9M transistors per mm², while the Pro WX 5100 has only 5,700 million transistors on a similar 232 mm² die, resulting in a much lower density of 24.6M per mm².

The core configurations tell a story of different design priorities. The 890M has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, along with 16 dedicated ray tracing cores. The Pro WX 5100 has more raw shading units at 1792, and more TMUs at 112, but also has 32 ROPs and no ray tracing cores at all. The clock speeds are wildly different: the 890M’s base clock is 400 MHz, boosting up to 2900 MHz, while the Pro WX 5100 starts at 713 MHz and boosts to only 1086 MHz. The 890M’s high boost clock helps it achieve a pixel rate of 92.80 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 185.6 GTexel/s, both of which far exceed the Pro WX 5100’s 34.75 GPixel/s and 121.6 GTexel/s.

Feature support also differs. The 890M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Pro WX 5100 only supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The bus interfaces are different as well, with the 890M using PCIe 4.0 x8 and the Pro WX 5100 using PCIe 3.0 x16. Finally, the power profiles are completely different: the 890M is an IGP with a 15 W TDP and no power connectors, while the Pro WX 5100 is a single-slot card with a 75 W TDP, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are uniform: the AMD Radeon 890M wins every single test, but the margins vary considerably. The most lopsided victories come in the compute and API-specific tests. In Passmark DirectX 11, the 890M’s score of 73 is 102.8% higher than the Pro WX 5100’s 36, effectively doubling the performance. Similarly, in Passmark GPU Compute, the 890M scores 4157 versus 2053, a 102.5% advantage. These two results show that the 890M’s architecture is far more efficient at handling modern shader workloads and general-purpose compute tasks.

The Geekbench results are also strongly in favor of the 890M. In OpenCL, the 890M scores 37254, which is 53.8% higher than the Pro WX 5100’s 24217. In Vulkan, the gap is similar, with the 890M at 40808 and the Pro WX 5100 at 26909, a 51.7% difference. These figures suggest that the 890M’s RDNA 3.5 design has a substantial IPC and throughput advantage over the older GCN 4.0 architecture, even though the Pro WX 5100 has more shading units.

In the Passmark suite, the 890M wins the DirectX 12 test with 37 versus 26, a 42.3% margin, and the DirectX 10 test with 33 versus 29, a 13.8% margin. The DirectX 9 test is the closest, with the 890M scoring 97 against the Pro WX 5100’s 88, a 10.2% difference. The 2D performance also favors the 890M, which scores 979 in Passmark G2D compared to 777 for the Pro WX 5100, a 26% advantage. The overall 3D performance metric, Passmark G3D, shows the 890M at 8076 versus 5496 for the Pro WX 5100, a 46.9% lead.

These numbers paint a picture of a modern GPU that is not just slightly better, but dramatically faster across the board. The smallest win for the 890M is still a double-digit percentage gain in most cases, and the compute-heavy tests show it is more than twice as fast. The data clearly indicates that the 890M is the superior performer for almost any workload that these benchmarks represent.

Specification Differences

The specifications that differ between the two GPUs are extensive, reflecting their different generations and intended use cases. The process node is a major difference: the 890M uses 4 nm TSMC, while the Pro WX 5100 uses 14 nm GlobalFoundries. The transistor count is dramatically different, with the 890M at 34,000 million versus 5,700 million for the Pro WX 5100. The die sizes are nearly identical (233 mm² vs 232 mm²), but the transistor density is vastly different at 145.9M / mm² versus 24.6M / mm².

Clock speeds differ significantly: the 890M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost of 2900 MHz, while the Pro WX 5100 has a base of 713 MHz and a boost of 1086 MHz. The memory configuration is entirely different, with the 890M using system shared memory and the Pro WX 5100 using 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The shading units and TMUs differ (1024/64 for the 890M vs 1792/112 for the Pro WX 5100), while ROPs are the same at 32. The 890M has 16 ray tracing cores, while the Pro WX 5100 has none.

The TDP is a major differentiator: 15 W for the 890M versus 75 W for the Pro WX 5100. The bus interface differs (PCIe 4.0 x8 vs PCIe 3.0 x16), as do the display outputs (portable device dependent vs 4x DisplayPort 1.4a). The 890M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Pro WX 5100 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. The Pro WX 5100 has physical dimensions of 173 mm in length and 112 mm in height, while the 890M has no listed dimensions as an IGP. The production status also differs, with the 890M active and the Pro WX 5100 end-of-life.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous about raw performance: the AMD Radeon 890M is the faster GPU in every single benchmark tested. It wins all nine comparisons, with an average benchmark score of 9210 versus 8863 for the Pro WX 5100. For anyone looking at sheer benchmark numbers, the 890M is the clear choice. It offers more than double the performance in DirectX 11 and compute workloads, and it does so while consuming a fraction of the power, with a 15 W TDP versus 75 W for the Pro WX 5100.

However, the Pro WX 5100 is not without its merits, though they are not performance-related. It has 8 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth, which is a fixed resource that does not depend on system RAM. The 890M relies on system shared memory, meaning its bandwidth and capacity are system dependent. For certain professional workloads that require dedicated VRAM, this could be a consideration, even if the 890M’s compute performance is superior. The Pro WX 5100 also has a specific form factor with a 173 mm length and 112 mm height, making it a known quantity for workstation builds, whereas the 890M is an IGP that depends on the host laptop or mini-PC.

The production status also matters. The 890M is active and current, while the Pro WX 5100 is end-of-life. This means the 890M is a future-proof option with newer API support, including DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4. The Pro WX 5100 is legacy hardware, and its API support is capped at DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. For a new purchase, the data strongly favors the 890M, as it is faster, more efficient, and more modern in every measurable way.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the AMD Radeon 890M wins in every category where a comparison exists. It is the winner in all API-specific tests: DirectX 9 (97 vs 88), DirectX 10 (33 vs 29), DirectX 11 (73 vs 36), and DirectX 12 (37 vs 26). It also wins in the general compute tests, with Geekbench OpenCL (37254 vs 24217), Geekbench Vulkan (40808 vs 26909), and Passmark GPU Compute (4157 vs 2053). Its 2D performance is better as well, with a Passmark G2D score of 979 versus 777.

The Pro WX 5100 has no benchmark wins to its name. Its only potential advantages lie outside the benchmark suite. It has dedicated 8 GB GDDR5 memory, which is a fixed quantity, whereas the 890M’s memory is system shared and variable. It also has a specific, documented physical footprint and a 250 W suggested PSU, which might be a consideration for system builders who need a known power envelope. However, the 890M’s 15 W TDP means it requires no additional power connectors and is far more energy-efficient. For use cases like gaming, general compute, or any workload represented by the Passmark and Geekbench tests, the 890M is the definitive winner. The Pro WX 5100’s only niche would be a legacy workstation environment that specifically requires a dedicated PCIe card with fixed VRAM, but even then, its performance is significantly lower across the board.